Equita Bailiff placed a levy on a car which is not mine

[nalglondon]

Hi

I've been bullied around by bailiffs from Equita, although I've paid more than 3/4 of the debt regarding council tax and have also been going around regarding charges that they're applying.

I live in a semi-detached house which has 3 flats and common parking for the 3 flats.

Last week I received a notice of levy from a bailiff regarding a car which actually belongs to my neighbour. I don't even own a car.

Can they do that being that the car could belong to any of the 3 residents?

Do they have to check who the car belongs to before taking action? I'd rather not have to disclose to my neighbours this situation.

Thanks for for the help!

[bluebottle]

Re: Equita Bailiff placed a levy on a car which is not mine

Hi

I've been bullied around by bailiffs from Equita, although I've paid more than 3/4 of the debt regarding council tax and have also been going around regarding charges that they're applying.

I live in a semi-detached house which has 3 flats and common parking for the 3 flats.

Last week I received a notice of levy from a bailiff regarding a car which actually belongs to my neighbour. I don't even own a car.

Can they do that being that the car could belong to any of the 3 residents? Random levying is a tactic a number of bailiff companies use. Strictly speaking, it is illegal to levy on goods not being the property of a debtor and then charge or attempt to charge a fee for doing so. It is also illegal to levy on goods not being the property of a debtor, removing or attempting to remove them and then sell them.

Do they have to check who the car belongs to before taking action? I'd rather not have to disclose to my neighbours this situation.
Yes they do. If they don't, the bailiff responsible could be in serious trouble. You need to let your neighbour know and he/she needs to challenge Equita about this. They also need to make a formal complaint to the local authority against Equita. They would be best making the complaint to the Head of Revenues and CEO. Which council is involved, please?

Thanks for for the help!

Hi and welcome to LB. Responses are in red text.

[bizzybob]

Re: Equita Bailiff placed a levy on a car which is not mine

Bear in mind all fees associated with the levy must be removed. After April it will be harder for a neighbour in that situation as if they cannot afford to pay all the fees and costs and the assessed value of the car for an interpleader into court to dispute ownership, then the bailiff can have the motor and sell it. Looks like HMG and MOJ have just legalised TWOC

[bluebottle]

Re: Equita Bailiff placed a levy on a car which is not mine

Bear in mind all fees associated with the levy must be removed. After April it will be harder for a neighbour in that situation as if they cannot afford to pay all the fees and costs and the assessed value of the car for an interpleader into court to dispute ownership, then the bailiff can have the motor and sell it. Looks like HMG and MOJ have just legalised TWOC

What you have described breaches Article 1 of the First Protocol (Protection of Possessions) of ECHR and Section 6, Human Rights Act 1998, BB.

A public authority cannot deprive a person of their possessions except under certain circumstances. If the person is not a debtor or fine defaulter, the bailiff, bailiff company and public authority are acting unlawfully if they deprive or attempt to deprive a person of their possessions without the authority of a court. I doubt that whoever drafted the legislation bothered to check the legality of the provisions. Article 17 (Prohibition of Abuse of Rights) and Article 18 (Limitation on Use of Restriction of Rights) are also applicable.

Remember that Convention rights are inalienable and inviolate. They cannot be taken away from a person and they cannot legislated against or out of existence, ignored,
ridden roughshod over or breached.

It looks like some Common Purpose nutter got pie-eyed, read Saul Alinsky's "Rules for Radicals", dreamt up the legislation, thinking it would ramp up tension and cause riots, but rather stupidly neglected to check ECHR. I can see a number of local authorities, bailiffs and bailiff companies being crucified by Section 6 of HRA. What would be funny is if some disingenuous bailiff tried to seize police officers' private motor vehicles and got tasered. Think of the number of hits that would get on YouTube.

[bizzybob]

Re: Equita Bailiff placed a levy on a car which is not mine

PART 6 THIRD PARTY CLAIMING CONTROLLED GOODS
Application of Part 6

48. This Part applies where a person (“the applicant”) makes an application to the court claiming that goods of which control has been taken are that person’s and not the debtor’s.
Payments into court by third party: underpayments

49. (1) Any underpayment to be determined by reference to an independent valuation under paragraph 60(5) of Schedule 12 must be undertaken by a qualified independent valuer.

(2) Any underpayment determined by the qualified independent valuer must be paid within 14 clear days after provision of a copy of the valuation to the applicant.


I can see this being a right feck up

Anyway OP here must treat anything Crapquita says with extreme suspicion, and demand the removal of the egregious unlawful levy and it's associated fees.

[bluebottle]

Re: Equita Bailiff placed a levy on a car which is not mine

PART 6 THIRD PARTY CLAIMING CONTROLLED GOODS
Application of Part 6

48. This Part applies where a person (“the applicant”) makes an application to the court claiming that goods of which control has been taken are that person’s and not the debtor’s.
Payments into court by third party: underpayments

49. (1) Any underpayment to be determined by reference to an independent valuation under paragraph 60(5) of Schedule 12 must be undertaken by a qualified independent valuer.

(2) Any underpayment determined by the qualified independent valuer must be paid within 14 clear days after provision of a copy of the valuation to the applicant.


I can see this being a right feck up

Anyway OP here must treat anything Crapquita says with extreme suspicion, and demand the removal of the egregious unlawful levy and it's associated fees.

TBH, BB, I doubt the provision you cite is even lawful. How can you force someone to pay for goods they own and a brainless bailiff seized and removed without lawful authority?

It is the "lawful authority" bit that is, I suspect, going to stuff local authorities, bailiff companies and bailiffs.

As you say, "It is going to be a right feck up". It will be. However, Clever Clogs has placed a link on his posts to the National Pro Bono Centre. I have to take my hat off to Cloggy because putting that up is pure genius.

With Grayling abolishing Legal Aid, people need a way of defending their rights and that is where the National Pro Bono Centre comes in. Also, Grayling rather unwisely decided to stick the boot in the legal profession. Big mistake. I have said in the past that people would resort to law to defeat the disingenuous creeps currently calling themselves a "coalition government", rather than take to the streets and riot. Grayling has been stupid - very stupid. I think we are about to see the civil enforcement industry, coalition government and the likes of ATOS, Capita and Liberata face their nemesis - the will of the British people. Hang on tight because it's going to be a rough ride.

[bizzybob]

Re: Equita Bailiff placed a levy on a car which is not mine

What I posted above is from the Act itself, it is ambiguous in some ways as it implies that the aggrieved party must pay the value of the goods as valued by an independent valuer, and of course the costs and bailiff fees into court for the interpleader. If they lose the bailiff probably gets the lot.

[CleverClogs]

Re: Equita Bailiff placed a levy on a car which is not mine

I've been bullied around by bailiffs from Equita, although I've paid more than 3/4 of the debt regarding council tax and have also been going around regarding charges that they're applying.

This looks odd, right from the start. Aren't nuns exempt from paying Council Tax?

I live in a semi-detached house which has 3 flats and common parking for the 3 flats.

Last week I received a notice of levy from a bailiff regarding a car which actually belongs to my neighbour. I don't even own a car.

Can they do that being that the car could belong to any of the 3 residents?

Of course they cannot do so lawfully but, as your local council is infested by the outsourcing company Capita, the bailiff won't care about that.
Equita is part of the same group, so any complaints to the council or to the bailiffs will probably just be brushed off.

What Crapita cannot quite do, though, is to own your local councillors or your MP. Find who they are at https://www.writetothem.com

You may think that you've paid off some 75% of the debt but, if you bothered to check, you'll probably learn that you've apparently paid rather less - the rest will have been swallowed up in fees (both lawful and unlawful) charged by the bailiffs.

[nalglondon]

Re: Equita Bailiff placed a levy on a car which is not mine

Hi
Thanks for all the info! I've been disputing all the charges that Equita have tried to apply and they're all unjustified and fraudulent. Have complained several times to Barnet Council regarding it, asked them to take the debt back due to this and they simply refuse to take it back. Should I also complain to the Local Government Ombudsman? Thanks!

[nalglondon]

Re: Equita Bailiff placed a levy on a car which is not mine

Hi
Yes, I've paid now £1056 out of the original £1250 that I owed. I am disputing every single charge that Equita is applying as I consider them to be fake and fraudulent. Have sent several emails to Barnet Council and they just don't care about it.

[bizzybob]

Re: Equita Bailiff placed a levy on a car which is not mine

If you pay a bailiff, they keep most of the money for themselves, they will keep inventing and applying fees to keep more for themselves, ad infinitum. Bailiff fees and their inventiveness is as corrosive as the intrest on a Wonga or other payday loan. There is no law that compels you to speak or even spit on a bailiff.

[CleverClogs]

Re: Equita Bailiff placed a levy on a car which is not mine

Thanks for all the info! I've been disputing all the charges that Equita have tried to apply and they're all unjustified and fraudulent. Have complained several times to Barnet Council regarding it, asked them to take the debt back due to this and they simply refuse to take it back. Should I also complain to the Local Government Ombudsman? Thanks!

Yes, I've paid now £1056 out of the original £1250 that I owed. I am disputing every single charge that Equita is applying as I consider them to be fake and fraudulent. Have sent several emails to Barnet Council and they just don't care about it.

There are ways to make the buggers care!

First of all, though, have you obtained a breakdown of the alleged fees and charges that Equita has applied to your account? If you have, could you post their response here? If you have not, or if they are playing at Silly Buggers, use the first letter from the "Useful Letters" page, at http://www.legalbeagles.info/forums/...Useful-Letters

To complain to the LGO, you would first need to exhaust the official complaints procedure. You may also wish to complain to the Barnet Council Chief Operating Officer and Director of Finance, who is Chris Naylor - email: chris.naylor@barnet.gov.uk and/or the Barnet Council CEO, who is Andrew Travers and whose email address is andrew.travers@barnet.gov.uk

If the complaints procedure does not work, send the appropriate letter from the "Useful Letters" page to Mr Naylor, by email and by Recorded Delivery; if he replies that the fees and charges are legitimate, then send the appropriate letter to Mr Travers. If you still have not received a satisfactory response, then go to the LGO

To contact Baroness Margaret Wall of New Barnet, her 'phone number is 020 721 96526 and her email address is wallm@parliament.uk

To embarrass the Council, their Twitter account is https://twitter.com/@BarnetCouncil

[bluebottle]

Re: Equita Bailiff placed a levy on a car which is not mine

What I posted above is from the Act itself, it is ambiguous in some ways as it implies that the aggrieved party must pay the value of the goods as valued by an independent valuer, and of course the costs and bailiff fees into court for the interpleader. If they lose the bailiff probably gets the lot.

I know that Milo is working very hard to get it clarified and/or amended, but I suspect the provision will fall at the first hurdle due to its incompatibility with Convention rights under ECHR and Section 6, HRA 1998. As you quite rightly said the other day, BB, the HRA penetrates a lot more deeply than other legislation can or does. If a person's possessions have been seized by some disingenuous, dishonest or incompetent bailiff without lawful authority and without a court having ruled the person is liable to pay any sum of money, the person cannot be made to forfeit their possessions or pay for their restoration. The bailiff, bailiff company and creditor, if a public authority, would be acting unlawfully from the outset. Far from receiving fees, I suspect a lot of people who go down the HRA route will have bailiffs, bailiff companies and public authorities slapped with a court order to stop any attempt to sell, followed by a hearing at which the bailiff, bailiff company and public authority are likely to be crucified. It would only need one such case and I suspect the civil enforcement industry will be shaken from its complacency and arrogance and realise that it is subject to the same laws as everyone else and compliance with those laws is not optional.

It is all very well Cameron, Grayling and May bleating about foreign judges telling them what to do - a reference to the judges who sit in the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg - but if Cameron, Grayling and May didn't break the law, the Court would not have to intervene and put them back in their box. The UK is hauled before ECHR up to 10 times each year for human rights violations and in 70% of cases is found to be in breach of the Convention. That is not a good example to set and more than a tad hypocritical when criticising other countries over their human rights record.

[bizzybob]

Re: Equita Bailiff placed a levy on a car which is not mine

nunolondon, I suspect that all the fees were added before the bailiff even came out and as they assume by relying of the (discredited) case of Observer v Gordon 1983 that any nearby motor is yours to justify the levy fee a van fee and attending to remove fee, adding hundreds to the bill. You should do as advised by bluebottle and Cleverclogs.

To avoid confusing you, what I posted earlier is what the situation may be after April when a new regime comes in, as in £380 at the first knock, and an interpleader to dispute ownership as is used for HCEO, and High Court Writs where the HCEO seizes third party goods.

[CleverClogs]

Re: Equita Bailiff placed a levy on a car which is not mine

There is no law that compels you to speak or even spit on a bailiff.

Or even to piss on one were he to catch fire. :flame: